Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-kl59c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-21T23:22:57.776Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Attention in Cognitive Science and Second Language Acquisition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2008

Russell S. Tomlin  and
Victor Villa
Russell S. Tomlin
Affiliation:
University of Oregon
Victor Villa
Affiliation:
University of Oregon
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper examines how the cognitive notion of attention has been employed in SLA and how it is understood in cognitive science. It summarizes recent research on attention from cognitive and neuroscience approaches. Some reformulations of problems raised in SLA research related to attention are proposed. Current research offers detailed ideas about attention and its component processes. These ideas, elaborated theoretically and empirically in cognitive neuroscience, may help untangle some important but difficult issues in SLA. Early, coarse-grained conceptions of attention, such as the limited-capacity metaphor or the automatic versus controlled processing dichotomy, are recast into an integrated human attention system with three separate yet interrelated networks: alertness, orientation, and detection. This finer grained analysis of attention is employed in a model of the role of attention in SLA.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 16 , Issue 2 , June 1994 , pp. 183 - 203
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Allport, A. (1988). What concept of consciousness? In Marcel, A. J. & Bisiach, E. (Eds.), Consciousness in contemporary science (pp. 159–182). London: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Allport, A. (1989). Visual attention. In Posner, M. I. (Ed.), Foundations of cognitive science (pp. 631–682). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, J. R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. R. (1990). Cognitive psychology and its implications. New York: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Anderson, R. C., & Ortony, A. (1975). On putting apples into bottles–A problem of polysemy. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 167–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bates, E., & Devescovi, A. (1989). Crosslinguistic studies of sentence production. In MacWhinney, B. & Bates, E. (Eds.), The Crosslinguistic study of sentence processing (pp. 225–256). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1981). Second language acquisition from a functionalist perspective: Pragmatic, semantic, and perceptual strategies. In Winitz, H. (Ed.), Native language and foreign language acquisition (pp. 190–214). New York: New York Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1987). Competition, variation, and language learning. In MacWhinney, B. (Ed.), Mechanisms of language acquisition (pp. 157–193). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E. (1978). A theoretical model of second language acquisition. Language Learning, 28, 69–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E. (1981). Some evidence for the integrity and interaction of two knowledge sources. In Andersen, R. W. (Ed.), New dimensions in second language acquisition research (pp. 62–74). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E. (1988). Levels of bilingualism and levels of linguistic awareness. Developmental Psychology, 24, 560–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E. (1990). The competence of processing: Classifying theories of second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 24, 635–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E. (1992). Attentional control in children's metalinguistic performance and measures of field independence. Developmental Psychology, 28, 654–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E. (1994). Analysis and control in the development of second language proficiency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 157–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E., & Sharwood-Smith, M. (1985). Interlanguage is not a state of mind: An evaluation of the construct for second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 6, 101–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carr, T. H., & Curran, T. (1994). Cognitive factors in learning about structured sequences: Applications to syntax. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 205–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curran, T., & Keele, S. W. (1993). Attentional and nonattentional forms of sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 189–202.Google Scholar
Doughty, C. (1991). Second language instruction does make a difference: Evidence from an empirical study of SL relativization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13, 431–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, J. (1980). The locus of interference in the perception of simultaneous stimuli. Psychological Review, 87(3), 272–300.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eckman, F. R., Bell, L., & Nelson, D. (1988). On the generalization of relative clause instruction in the acquisition of English as a second language. Applied Linguistics, 9, 11–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. M. (1986). An interactionist approach to L2 sentence interpretation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 8, 19–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. M. (1987). The resolution of conflicts among competing systems. Applied Psycholinguistics, 8, 329–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. M. (1989). How do learners resolve linguistic conflicts? In Gass, S. M. & Schachter, J. (Eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition (pp. 183–199). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. M., & Madden, C. G. (Ed.). (1985). Input in second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Gernsbacher, M. A., & Faust, M. (1991). The mechanism of suppression: A component of general comprehension skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 77(2), 245–263.Google Scholar
Givón, T. (1990). Natural language learning and organized language teaching. In Burmeister, H. & Rounds, P. (Eds.), Variability in second language acquisition: Proceedings of the 10th meeting of the Second Language Research Forum. Eugene, OR: Department of Linguistics, University of Oregon.Google Scholar
Harley, B. (1989). Functional grammar in French immersion: A classroom experiment. Applied Linguistics, 10, 331–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulstijn, J. (1989). Implicit and incidental second language learning: Experiments in the processing of natural and partly artificial input. In Dechert, H. W. & Raupauch, M. (Eds.), Interlingual processes. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
Kihlstrom, J. F. (1987). The cognitive unconscious. Science, 238, 1445–1452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krashen, S. D. (1977a). The Monitor Model for second language performance. In Burt, M., Dulay, H., & Finocchiaro, M. (Eds.), Viewpoints on English as a second language (pp. 152–161). New York: Regents.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. D. (1977b). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. D. (1977c). Some issues related to the Monitor Model. In Brown, H. D., Yorio, C., & Crymes, R. (Eds.), On TESOL '77: Teaching and learning English as a second language: Trends in reseach and practice (pp. 144–158). Washington, DC: TESOL.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. D. (1978). Individual variation in the use of the Monitor. In Ritchie, W. C. (Ed.), Second language acquisition research: Issues and implications (pp. 175–183). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. D., & Scarcella, R. (1978). On routines and patterns in language acquisition and performance. Language Learning, 28, 283–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lightbown, P. M. (1984). The relationship between theory and method in second language acquisition research. In Davies, A., Criper, C., & Howatt, A. P. R. (Eds.), Interlanguage (pp. 241–252). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (1990). Focus-on-form and corrective feedback in communicative language teaching: Effects on second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 429–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, M. H. (1983). Does second language instruction make a difference? A review of research. TESOL Quarterly, 17, 359–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B., & Bates, E. (Eds.). (1989). The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Marcel, A. J. (1983). Conscious and unconscious perception: Experiments on visual masking and word recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 15, 197–237.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McLaughlin, B. (1978). The Monitor Model: Some methodological considerations. Language Learning, 28, 309–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLaughlin, B. (1980a). On the use of miniature artificial languages in second-language research. Applied Psycholinguistics, 1, 353–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLaughlin, B. (1980b). Towards a theory of speech processing: Some methodological considerations. In Dechert, H. W. & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Temporal variables in speech: Studies in honour of Frieda Goldman-Eisler (pp. 291–298). The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLaughlin, B. (1985). Second language acquisition in childhood (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Mclaughlin, B. (1987). Theories of second language learning. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Mclaughlin, B. (1990). Restructuring. Applied Linguistics, 11, 113–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mclaughlin, B., Rossman, T., & McLeod, B. (1983). Second language learning: An information-processing perspective. Language Learning, 33, 135–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLeod, B., & McLaughlin, B. (1986). Restructuring or automaticity. Language Learning, 36, 109–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pashler, H. (1993). Doing two things at the same time. American Scientist, 81, 48–55.Google Scholar
Picton, T. W., Stuss, D. T., & Marshall, K. C. (1986). Attention and the brain. In Friedman, S. L., Klivington, K. A., & Peterson, R. W. (Eds.), The brain, cognition, and education (pp. 19–79). New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pienemann, M. (1984). Psychological constraints on the teachability of language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 6, 186–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Posner, M. I. (1978). Chronometric explorations of mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Posner, M. I. (1988). Structures and functions of selective attention. In Boll, T. & Bryant, B. (Eds.), Master lectures in clinical neuropsychology (pp. 173–206). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Posner, M. I. (1990). Hierarchical distributed networks in the neuropsychology of selective attention. In Caramazza, A. (Ed.), Cognitive neurospychology and neurolinguistics: Advances in models of cognitive function and impairment (pp. 187–210). New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Posner, M. I. (1992). Attention as a cognitive and neural system. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1, 11–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Posner, M. I., & Carr, T. H. (1992). Lexical access and the brain: Anatomical constraints on cognitive models of word recognition. American Journal of Psychology, 105, 1–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Posner, M. I., & Friedrich, F. J. (1986). Attention and control of cognition. In Friedman, S. L., Klivington, K. A., & Peterson, R. W. (Eds.), The brain, cognition, and education (pp. 80–103). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Posner, M. I., & McCandliss, B. D. (1993). Converging methods for investigating lexical access. American Psychological Society, 4(5), 305–309.Google Scholar
Posner, M. I., & Petersen, S. E. (1990). The attention system of the human brain. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 13, 25–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Posner, M. I., & Rothbart, M. K. (1992). Attentional mechanisms and conscious experience. In Milner, A. D. & Rugg, M. D. (Eds.), Foundations of neuropsychology series (pp. 91–112). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Posner, M. I., & Rothbart, M. K. (in press). Constructing neuronal theories of mind. In Koch, C. & Davis, J. (Eds.), Large scale neuronal theories of the brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Posner, M., & Snyder, C. (1975). Attention and cognitive control. In Solso, R. (Eds.), Information processing and cognition: The Loyola symposium (pp. 55–85). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Rutherford, W., & Sharwood-Smith, M. (1985). Consciousness raising and Universal Grammar. Applied Linguistics, 6, 274–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schacter, D. L. (1992). Consciousness and awareness in memory and amnesia: Critical issues. In Milner, A. D. & Rugg, M. D. (Eds.), Foundations of neuropsychology series (pp. 180–200). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 127–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, R. (1992). Psychological mechanisms underlying second language fluency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14, 357–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, R. (1993a). Awareness and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 13, 206–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, R. (1993b, 08). Consciousness in second language learning: Introduction. Paper presented at AILA 10th World Congress of Applied Linguistics, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. (1993c). Consciousness, learning, and interlanguage pragmatics. In Kasper, G. & Blum-Kulka, S. (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics (pp. 21–42). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, R. (in press). Implicit learning and the cognitive unconscious: Of artificial grammars and SLA. In Ellis, N. (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. W., & Frota, S. N. (1986). Developing basic conversational ability in a second language: A case study of an adult learner of Portuguese. In Day, R. (Ed.), Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition (pp. 237–326). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Sharwood-Smith, M. (1981). Consciousness-raising and the second language learner. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 159–169.Google Scholar
Sharwood-Smith, M. (1986a). Comprehension vs. acquisition: Two ways of processing input. Applied Linguistics, 7, 239–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharwood-Smith, M. (1986b). The competence/control model, crosslinguistic influence and the creation of new grammars. In Kellerman, E. & Sharwood-Smith, M. (Eds.), Cross-linguistic influence in second language acquisition (pp. 10–20). Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Sharwood-Smith, M. (1991). Speaking to many minds: On the relevance of different types of language information for the L2 learner. Second Language Research, 7, 118–132.Google Scholar
Sperling, G. A. (1960). The information available in brief visual presentation. Psychological Monographs, 74(498), 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M., & Herron, C. (1989). Feedback for language transfer errors. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11, 385–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomlin, R. S. (1989, 02). The microanalysis of individual tutorials: The first hour. Paper presented at Second Language Research Forum, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Tomlin, R. S. (1991). Focal attention, voice, and word order: An experimental, cross-linguistic study (Tech. Rep. No. 91–10). Eugene: Institute for Cognitive and Decision Sciences, University of Oregon.Google Scholar
Tomlin, R. S. (in press-a). Modeling individual tutorial interactions: Theoretical and empirical bases for ICALL. In Holland, M., Kaplan, J., & Sams, M. (Eds.), Intelligent language tutors: Balancing theory and technology. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Tomlin, R. S. (in press-b). Repetition in second language acquisition. In Johnstone, B. (Ed.), Repetition in discourse (pp. 172–194). New York: Ablex.Google Scholar
Tomlin, R. S., & Douglas, S. A. (1989). Beginning second language instruction: Computer-based curriculum improvements (Final Report, Grant No. G008541129). Washington, DC: Fund for the Improvement of Post-Secondary Education.Google Scholar
Tomlin, R. S., & Yang, L. R. (1993, 03). Toward a cognitive model of the acquisition of voice. Paper presented at Second Language Research Forum, Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. (1989). Can learners attend to form and content while processing input? Hispania, 72, 409–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B. (1990). Attending to form and content in the input: An experiment in consciousness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 287–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B. (in press). Cognitive aspects of input processing in second language acquisition. In Hashemi-pour, P., Maldonado, I., & Naerssen, M. v. (Eds.), Festschrift for Tracey Terrell. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
White, L., Spada, N., Lightbown, P. M., & Ranta, L. (1991). Input enhancement and L2 question formation. Applied Linguistics, 12, 416–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wittrock, M. C. (1986). Education and recent research on attention and knowledge acquisition. In Friedman, S. L., Klivington, K. A., & Peterson, R. W. (Eds.), The Brain, cognition, and education. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Yang, L. R. (1993). Acquisition of a second language under controlled experimental conditions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon, Eugene.Google Scholar